FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules • Hacker News Board

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#261

Post by massysett » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:42 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #216

massysett wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "paralyzed" legislature just passed, by large margins, a large amount of foreign aid and a very significant provision on a popular social media platform. Before that it spent billions of dollars on covid aid. Throughout that time it has appropriated billions of dollars to keep the government running. This "paralyzed" narrative is something the press and politicians like to push because it serves their ends, thou…

> Throughout that time it has appropriated billions of dollars to keep the government running. In no other country is it considered an accomplishment for a government to debate a budget, agree on it, pass it, spend it, and then three quarters of the way through the year refuse to pay for the spending it agreed on, manufacturing a crisis that sometimes gets resolved at the eleventh hour, and sometimes results in a mul…

> three quarters of the way through the year refuse to pay for the spending it agreed on,

At no time did this happen.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#262

Post by a_wild_dandan » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:42 PM UTC

hathawsh wrote: post #233

feoren wrote: post #167

This flip-flopping happens because there is no commonality to find. One of the only (effectively) two major political parties of the United States is completely uninterested in governing. They have no policy. They have no plan for governing; they don't like governing. Their only goal is the piecemeal selloff of government powers to the highest bidder, and they convince their stalwart followers of this by making sure…

Don't you think that is a very cynical view? The party or parties you disagree with may not share your views, but they do have many things in common with you. In order to build bridges with other parties, it's important to believe that the majority of people who get involved in government, regardless of party, are motivated primarily by the desire to serve their neighbors and their country; otherwise they would find…

That's a wonderful perspective, and largely shared by one party! If you can make the other party act like adults, we'll be in business.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#263

Post by jl6 » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:42 PM UTC

lolinder wrote: post #218

feoren wrote: post #167

This flip-flopping happens because there is no commonality to find. One of the only (effectively) two major political parties of the United States is completely uninterested in governing. They have no policy. They have no plan for governing; they don't like governing. Their only goal is the piecemeal selloff of government powers to the highest bidder, and they convince their stalwart followers of this by making sure…

This comment isn't directed at OP, it's directed at anyone reading this who might be tempted to get swept up in OP's stereotypes without thinking critically about them. I'm writing this as a left-leaning moderate who grew up among staunch conservatives and understands their philosophy very well. Conservatives sincerely believe that government bureaucracies are less efficient than a free market economy. That's not a c…

In this thread we see the iron law of 21st century American polarization and the uttermost death of nuance. I’m sure someone will come along to argue how nuance is a luxury we can’t afford in the face of these communist/fascist maniacs.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#264

Post by Gormo » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:42 PM UTC

tootie wrote: post #125

SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

[flagged]

Voters aren't voting for policies at all. They're voting for candidates who come as a package deal, and often have to make tradeoffs among their own policy positions as no single candidate aligns with them on all issues. On top of that voters are casting their votes in an electoral process rife with gerrymandering, wedge issues, exaggerated or fabricated crisis rhetoric, party-line voters, and other distortions.

The idea that the behavior of the government is ever a consistent reflection of the aggregated intentions of the electorate is something of a fantasy. No one is intentionally voting for bad policy -- they're getting bad policy in one area as a consequence of voting for good policy in another.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#265

Post by graycat » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:42 PM UTC

ModernMech wrote: post #210

graycat wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (faster if Trump gets another term). I didn't keep track and don't have a good list, but a guess is that Trump did push through a lot of regulatory changes. If the media would publish a well documented list ...!! From all I've seen, I like Trump, but apparently a lot of people don't. I wonder where am I going wrong. Why do some people not like him? A guess is the now old collection of video clips from the MSM (main…

> From all I've seen, I like Trump, but apparently a lot of people don't. I wonder where am I going wrong. Are you being sarcastic? Did you miss the part where he waged an attempted coup against the US government to remain in power? I mean... he was just found by a court to have committed rape. You don't see why people don't like him? Be for real.

> Are you being sarcastic? Did you miss the part where he waged an attempted coup against the US government to remain in power?

I never understood that: I watched his speech. All I saw looked reasonable, appropriate, prudent. It seemed he was careful to advise no violence. That there was an "attempted coup" makes no sense to me. I watched his speech and saw nothing wrong.

> I mean... he was just found by a court to have committed rape.

I didn't and don't see that.

But, if what you say is correct, then that would explain why some people don't like him.

From your post, it looks like there is some deep bitterness about Trump. I don't see why, but okay. For one explanation there is that old collection of media video clips

https://youtu.be/f1ab6uxg908

Apparently the media was totally convinced that those clips would doom Trump; maybe those clips are why some people don't like him.

Watch the clips -- if anything, by now they are entertaining! They have much of the largest of the MSM (mainstream media) doing a big gang up, pile on of "bombshell", "done, no question about that", etc. that never happened.

Maybe in low level town and city politics nearly everyone interested in politics at all has some really strong reasons to like the Democrat Party. If my startup works, maybe I'll discover that the local Democrats will do good things for me but the Republicans won't. Hmm.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#266

Post by redeeman » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:43 PM UTC

a_wild_dandan wrote: post #249

s3r3nity wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But they are also moving openly towards a fascist dictatorship Democrats have been calling on Biden to increase his power through just writing Executive Orders to act on their platform, and bypass all other branches of government...but THAT's not dictatorship?

Nope! That's called doing your job with the tools you've been given.

funny, thats definitely not what it was called when trump issued executive orders, there we had to endure things like the definition of dictator which tends to include "rules by decree" etc, as proof of him being a dictator :) oh how the winds are fleeting

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#267

Post by redeeman » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:44 PM UTC

da_chicken wrote: post #204

feoren wrote: post #167

This flip-flopping happens because there is no commonality to find. One of the only (effectively) two major political parties of the United States is completely uninterested in governing. They have no policy. They have no plan for governing; they don't like governing. Their only goal is the piecemeal selloff of government powers to the highest bidder, and they convince their stalwart followers of this by making sure…

I think they have a clear plan in two parts. 1. Since the opposition seeks progress in many forms, blindly obstruct them in all cases. 2. Legislate the country back to 1953. When that is accomplished, legislate the country back to 1853. The only part I'm unsure about is whether they're interested in renaming the nation "Gilead."

if you're just halfway serious, perhaps its time to seek some medical help

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#268

Post by Gormo » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:44 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #155

SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

We are flipfloppimg because the legislature is paralysed, so only the executive can function. This is a fundamental issue with the American form of government. Parliamentary systems which have the executive made up of members of the legislature have way less flip-flopping, finger-pointing, and paralysis. The governments they produce are more reflective of current public sentiment, end up with more than two parties, a…

The two-party system in the US is equivalent to a multiparty coalition system, just with the coalitions negotiated before the election instead of after it.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#269

Post by lokar » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:44 PM UTC

lolinder wrote: post #218

feoren wrote: post #167

This flip-flopping happens because there is no commonality to find. One of the only (effectively) two major political parties of the United States is completely uninterested in governing. They have no policy. They have no plan for governing; they don't like governing. Their only goal is the piecemeal selloff of government powers to the highest bidder, and they convince their stalwart followers of this by making sure…

This comment isn't directed at OP, it's directed at anyone reading this who might be tempted to get swept up in OP's stereotypes without thinking critically about them. I'm writing this as a left-leaning moderate who grew up among staunch conservatives and understands their philosophy very well. Conservatives sincerely believe that government bureaucracies are less efficient than a free market economy. That's not a c…

I agree with your statements, and they were true until sometime between Newt taking over and Trump being elected.

They used to have a a coherent positive viewpoint and policy to support it. And they sought to advance that policy through normal democratic means: convincing a majority of voters.

That has stopped being their approach. They no longer seek a genuine popular majority. They are turning inwards, adopting ever more extreme positions disconnected from genuine ideals. They seek only the power to impose their worldview on others.

They no longer feel constrained by long standing traditions and institutions. Any act is justified in their minds.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#270

Post by skeaker » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:45 PM UTC

richwater wrote: post #162

amelius wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bit like removing a traffic light from an intersection and then after a day saying "see, nothing happened, we don't need regulation from traffic lights". Laissez faire, everything will be alright.

> and then after a day It's been ~5.5 years since "the internet was doomed" by the FTC[0] How long are we supposed to wait for your doom prophecy to realize? [0] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet-exclusive/ex...

> How long are we supposed to wait for your doom prophecy to realize?

We shouldn't have waited at all, and in fact shouldn't have allowed it to be repealed in the first place. We have been extraordinarily lucky to have not had to deal with any nonsense from ISPs in all this time. California having their own NN law helped a lot. Now that we're back on track we can call it crisis averted, no harm no foul.